The Dot and the Line: A Romance in Lower Mathematics

We don't always get the same narration so I rarely mention it, but here Robert Morley provides a lovely tone to his alliterative narration depicting this most unlikely of love stories. The straight line, dependable and steady, loves the dot. The dot, suitably dotty, fancies the innovative and lively squiggle. This neglect attracts the attention of his fellow lines, but try as they might to make him see sense, he remains wistfully obsessed. Now he just spends him time imagining himself as a much more active and noble creation, but in the end - a line, is a line, is a line... This self deception is no good. Maybe he might as well just admit defeat? He will never be squiggle. Maybe he can be an angle, though? A series of the things? Might dot like this new talent? Well he'd best practice til he can make an infinite number of shapes and even curves. This is all empty though - he needs dot to join in. Can he dazzle her? This is cheerily scored with the subject matter providing Chuck Jones with a veritable myriad of shapes, colours and sizes and though it's maybe a bit repetitive it's still quite a good fun watch and personally, had I'd be line or squiggle I'd have told the fickle dot to get lost!

This short won an Academy Award and justly so. While others have said the scripted narration is not terribly good, I disagree. There are one or two excessively florid points, but Robert Morley's marvellous reading covers those and overall, the scripted narration is good. The animation succeeds in part because of the narration. Chuck Jones and Maurice Noble have every right to be well pleased with this cartoon. Why it isn't in print, I don't understand. Highly Recommended.

This opens with Cupid shooting at Dot and missing. Dot is not having Line who is way too straight. Dot is much more interested in having fun with Squiggle. The Line works to prove his worthiness. The big name here is legendary animator Chuck Jones who is the co-director. The narrator is noted actor Robert Morley. I think I remember seeing this some time in my childhood. It has the experimental style of the 60's. It's fun. I do have an idea for an extra scene. Line and Squiggle can have a shape-off. Like bodybuilders, they could pose into various shapes to entice Dot. That would be a great finale.

Yes: Amazing coincidence (and shades of the Blair Witch coincidence) Mr. Richard Wiley Jerome and I, Mr. Raymond Kenneth Petry, both of Sacramento CA USA at that time in Arden Junior High School, did Norton Juster's, The Dot And The Line, on his family's home movie camera - we called it, Planar-Vision - the camera had a single-frame feature, and with their tripod looking down on our display board, we pinned variously cloth cuttings of the Dot, velvet hemming for the Line (except when he looked thin and drawn and on-edge, we drew him, on-the-edge) and Squiggle was mohair yarn ... we shot the whole story. For voice we added his little sister, Jeanie, and for hours we re-recorded over our giggles and laughter, till we had it just right and well-timed: then we single-shot each scene straight-through by timings.

In 1965-69, we went to Rio Americano High School, and showed our mathematics class, eventually: We were both scholars: Rich went on to be Salutatorian for Rio Americano in 1969, and matriculated at Stanford, and I took 1st Place in the Central Valleys Math Quiz (against the MAA perfect-top-scorer) in 1969, and matriculated at UCSD, for my BA in mathematics.

The Dot and The Line is a most memorable story done in fun: We're delighted that Hollywood thought enough of it, too.

/rkp

I remember watching this as a young child. It was a real treat to be able to see it, since it wasn't like the other programs I'd watch. Although there was only one Dot and the Line, it was better than the Rugrats. The Dot and the Line will remain a part of what defined my childhood. When I told my friends about this great cartoon, they didn't understand what made it so interesting or funny. The art style alone is enough to try and find this film. The last time I saw it was back in 2000. Flash forward a few years. I'm walking through SF when I find myself at a small sidewalk sale. I take particular interest in one book. The title seems familiar. It's a reprint of Norton Juster's book. If you can find it, the book is just as good.